Early on I scored several major coups by enlisting the aid of various Raiderettes to the cause of Raider Nation. This drove the competition bonkers as they were driven insane by the very real speed by which Raider Nation was becoming the acknowledged leader for Raider fans on the Internet, and beyond. First they lost the coveted Raider Locker Room outlet by which the image and name of Raider Nation could be advertised daily through a brick and mortar outlet. Then they lost the battle for the very hearts of Raider fans when the Raider Nation moniker started to appear on the backs of cheerleaders – WTF, this is adding insult to injury. It was a brilliant execution of strategy aimed at making the Raider Nation brand well known and adopted as a symbol of Raider fans worldwide.
OK, there may be several teasers to the real lesson of building brand identity. What is undeniable is that a product or service can fail or succeed based upon the image that consumers have in their minds.
In 1996 the internet was secondary to the traditional marketing channels that existed at the time – meet and greets with the cheerleaders!! What was becoming clear, however, is that the internet could spread news and photos on current events much faster and across a much more diverse geographical base. Instead of only fans in the San Francisco Bay Area being able to see the latest news in the local rags there was now the ability to spread this info across the globe. No one appreciated the impact of the internet in this area more than I did when it came to formulating a strategy which would propel Raider Nation to the pinnacle of success.
The photos shown here were all published on the Raider Nation website exclusively and I, in effect, became the official photographer for events that were taking place at John Vella’s Raider Locker Room. The Raider Locker Room and Raider Nation became strategic partners in spreading the Raider Nation brand. Traditional brick and mortar retail was still the predominant method of sales in 1996 but to sell to a global fan base the internet was becoming the preferred marketing and sales channel. The symbiotic relationship between most retail outlets and the internet is taken for granted now, in 1996 Raider Nation was on the cutting edge.
I originally went to a t-shirt screen printer in Berkeley thinking where else would you go to get a far out wild design done the right way. Big mistake as it turns out they were good at concert graphics but simple sports designs were just not their thing.
From these drawings you can see the skull and bandana went through several iterations until it was done right. Once the design was finalized there was no doubt in my mind that it was going to be popular. The design incorporated all the base attributes which Raider fans identified with – skull and crossbones, being a team for the nation, and portraying the rogue mentality.
So, these original draft designs document the true origin of Raider Nation as this became the iconic symbol for the website and all merchandise associated with Raider Nation.
Tell me how we lost the $1.7 million settlement was the simple question that I asked over and over. The person stammered through several unintelligible answers but finally said the very fateful…….. “Because I Can”. Talk about the straw that broke the camels back!!! Finally, in those three words there was an admission that all the bad decisions and very questionable strategy boiled down to “Because I Can”. Really?
Why were there multiple trysts with government procurement officials… Because I Can
Why was there a million dollar plus loss on multiple projects and consistent profit fade on all the others… Because I Can
Why did we utilize subcontractors that went bankrupt and left us holding the bag… Because I Can
Why were projects underbid to the point where it was impossible to make money without resorting to unethical practices like stiffing subcontractors… Because I Can
Why were safety procedures and protocols not strictly enforced to prevent unexploded ordinance from being sold to third parties unremediated and causing bodily harm… Because I Can
Why did the senior manager alienate very capable staff to the point that they left the firm… Because I Can
Why were there projects in questionable parts of the world where other firms went to die… Because I Can
Why were bonding companies not told the entire truth about problem projects… Because I can
Why were investors in other assets made to fight for what was rightfully theirs… Because I Can
Why do I focus on WIP when cash is the only reality… Because I Can
When it dawned on me that the investments made in this firm were subject to going poof because of this “Because I Can” philosophy it was time to head for the exit.
Time to cash in my chips and preserve what I could before the head pinhead pissed it away just because they could. Better to get out with what you could instead of sticking around waiting for the inevitable face plants that kept occurring.
There has been a continued brain drain from this firm as it becomes apparent to many others that the firms upper management lacks the ability to lead. It continues to have the self centered “Because I Can” mentality that has it on the Highway to Hell. Multiple lawsuits filed against the company with no end in sight. Correction, there is an end in sight – for the company as an ongoing entity.
Lesson learned: don’t wait until your investment in a firm goes to zero when it becomes apparent that you have placed your money on a losing proposition. Use the “Because I Can” philosophy to your benefit!! I left, Because I can…….
.. Or Adios Losers
The best part about banging your head against the wall for years is the fact that it feels so good when you stop.
The magnitude of the issues became clearer the longer I remained at one firm. Continually trying to bring about constructive change was met with such resistance from upper management that the best solution was to exit before the inevitable face plant took place.
With twenty twenty hindsight it is evident that the better decision may have been to let this firm implode from their bad decisions years ago instead of propping up the bad mistakes and poor project management. Looking back there is no doubt that upper management lacked the self awareness to see that they were the problem and, therefore, allowing them to continue on only propagated bad management.
The glue that held the firm together over the years was the finance/accounting function by continually working the banking and bonding relationship in a positive manner. This in spite of the consistently poor project management and estimating.
Such a weight was lifted off my shoulders when the decision was made that the situation was beyond repair – it was FUBAR. You had senior management discussing personal likes and dislikes inappropriately and taking exception to staff performance for no other reason than because they may have been more attractive than some senior manager cared for. One of my biggest regrets is that I participated in the lunacy for as long as I did and allowed, via silence, this inappropriate behavior to go on for so long.
What became clearer as time went on was that the founders of this firm were completely incapable of managing not just the firm but, more importantly, their personal life. As my beliefs diverged more and more from those who sought to “lead” this firm it became even clearer that I could no longer support the insanity. What was insane you ask? Let’s obsess on the WIP calculation as if there was a WIP God that would bar your entrance to heaven if it was off. Of course, forget about the fact that the estimate was whacked to begin with, that no one updated the already whacked estimate as the project progressed, and the fact that the senior managers did not have a clue what WIP represented. This for projects that were already bid so low below breakeven that you had no chance of making enough margin to cover the firms overhead. Then having to sit in meetings where the fearless leaders of the firm would wonder why they could not make any profit. Please put a gun to my head and put me out of my misery. Talking to this group was akin to speaking to a group of remedial students except for one big exception – that being that remedial students had a hope of comprehension, LOL. This group believed so completely in the righteousness of their wrong minded ideas that they would go down in flames believing in them. They firmly believed the earth was flat even though all evidence pointed otherwise.
More disturbing was the cover-up that senior management engaged in once the jig was up. “We expected you to tell us we had a $3 million hole to crawl out of!”. “It is your job to let management know when we are going sideways”. REALLY?? Pull up the last 100 emails that went to your numbnut asses regarding the need to remedy the estimating procedure or the need to close unprofitable regions. Oh, I get it – you didn’t read those since they did not fit your reality but NOW you want to issue a revisionist telling of history which basically states that you were never made aware of these issues! Wankers.
Early on at this firm I treated the original shareholders with deference given they had invested sweat equity into starting the firm. Over time, however, this deference was removed when the dysfunctional behavior and poor management made it impossible to support such behavior. It was not uncommon that new staff would fall prey to the whims of senior management and their juvenile behavior. Going with the flow was impossible unless one wanted to condone unacceptable trysts and borderline illegal procurement practices. The refrain became “well that is just the way management is” or “don’t they know how badly their actions reflect on the firm”. For me deference to such poor management was no longer an option. Chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow was no longer an option as I came to realize there was no pot of gold, only an outhouse of manure.
Lesson learned: when you are on a ship of fools it is never too early to abandon ship.
As things started to spiral out of control at one firm the powers to be became increasingly unhinged. The typical reaction was completely expected, lowering “business” decisions down to a personal vindictive level.
No more snack boxes for staff, let’s discontinue employee benefits, and meetings with all key outside relationships will involve the unhinged senior management. The refrain was in line with No More Wire Hangers – it was No Lunches without senior management involved. “You will involve me in all meetings, in all discussions, and in all your potty breaks, LOL”. It became a comedy of epic proportions starring senior management.
Devious management will many times concurrently have secret discussions with outside counsel to lay traps or to circumvent legally established agreements with staff and business partners. None of this should be unexpected and every move that this type of management takes can be anticipated. No more wire hangers, indeed.
These types of moves are completely vindictive for this type of management as they do not like continual questioning of large losses being incurred by the firm or questioning their inability to formulate a cohesive logical strategy. The outcome of years of bad decisions finally coming to a head eventually leads to erosion of support for a senior management group which continually teeters on the brink of failure. Dysfunctional behavior common for this type company becomes too great to be ignored and competent staff leave before the ship sinks. What is left behind are the “C” level players who have risen to their highest level of incompetence and have no other place to go. They stay with a mother ship which protects the incompetent as the bar used to measure competency is so low they are seen as superstars. As the song goes, “I have been down so long it looks like up to me”. Without a doubt Moe, Larry and Curly are not the sharpest knives in the drawer.
Let’s look a little closer at some of the actions these types of companies take:
Imagine a road trip with the bonding agents and this type of dysfunctional senior management. It would not be uncommon for things not to be disclosed to the financial or bonding agents regarding key projects and financial metrics heading in the wrong direction. The bonding agent might try to corner the finance guy repeatedly during these types of trips to get updates. The finance guy has to play the equivalent of hide and seek to avoid having a definitive conversation on the projects in question. The natural course of things transpire and with any luck the new bonding request will be rejected. Not without justification, as firms like this that are not being forthright about bonded projects should not be allowed to continue with this bad behavior. Finance and Accounting should not be complicit in spinning a positive tale on projects that are being so poorly managed. NO MORE WIRE HANGERS
Recall from above that this type of senior management undertakes legal discussions and this necessitates radio silence over some period of time before they spring their trap. This radio silence works against them in so many ways but is completely inline with the juvenile and vindictive manner in which this type of management acts.
Let’s say that the marketing person comes into your office wanting a signature for a new bid bond for a proposal in a far corner of the world. Would you not expect to ask the usual questions for these types of proposal bonds? One, in particular, is whether the bonding agent is aware that the bond might be needed in this remote area by a certain date to meet a bid deadline. Let’s also say that the marketing person, being relatively new, is not able to answer the questions, and given radio silence by dysfunctional senior management, up to date info on what was going on with the proposal is not available. Would it not make sense to go to the bonding broker and ask a question that is simple enough – are you aware of the need for this bond and could it be delivered on time? Second, are you up to date on the issues regarding the currently bonded projects? Let’s suppose the replies are Yes and No – informing them that there were problems on projects that were being resolved is the proper thing to do, don’t you think? Not a big deal, or so one would think, but not when senior management has become completely unhinged.
Imagine the reaction of Joan Crawford to NO MORE WIRE HANGERS, LOL. Senior management can become so detached from reality that they regress even further into illogical and self defeating behavior. Cut off internet access, remove access to all company servers, there will be NO MORE WIRE HANGERS. Insanity can be unleashed and there is nothing to counterbalance the insanity. Senior management spun out of control. Paranoia reigns and what you might hear is – They are trying to get our bonding revoked, they are trying to destroy us, blah, blah, blah. Really? A simple call to make sure a bond will be delivered on time and clarify project status turns into collusion with the Russians, LOL. NO MORE WIRE HANGERS.
Needless to say, you should avoid getting to a last day at firms like this as they could be very eventful with the NO MORE WIRE HANGERS management – you could be taken out and shot. The repercussions could last over several months as further shenanigans by senior management takes place to prove Russian collusion, LOL. There must be NO MORE WIRE HANGERS – it is the height of groupthink and example of senior management not being in touch with reality.
Something learned over the years at these types of firms is that there is no such thing as transparency and, worse yet, honesty in how senior management deals with situations. Whatever you are told needs to be dissected to make sure there are no ulterior motive that are intended to serve only the select few at the expense of everyone else. This experience and knowledge will serve you well when leaving a firm like this. Being two steps ahead of your opponent and questioning their every move by not taking things at face value is the secret to success when dealing with these types.
Lesson learned: stay two steps ahead of those who are not transparent with their motives, it will serve you well in the final analysis. When management becomes unhinged you need to protect your ASSets by not taking anything at face value.
During the reign of Raider Nation I had several “beat” reporters who were conducting interviews with players and management of the Oakland Raiders. It was a heady time as it gave me direct contact with some of the most influential people in the Raider organization – past and present. Below is an interview that was done for Raider Nation in 1998 with Ken Stabler:
|With long hair flowing out of the back of his helmet, quarterback Kenny Stabler, number 12, embodied the renegade Raiders during the 1970s.Known somewhat undeservedly throughout his career for his propensity to party, Stabler never let his reputed off-the-field exploits overshadow his heroics on Sundays. He was the leader of pro football’s bad boys, a team featuring the giant defensive end with the handlebar moustache, Ben Davidson; combative linebacker Phil Villapiano; eccentric but talented tight end Dave Casper; and the University of Mars graduate, defensive lineman Otis Sistrunk. These great players and their Raider teammates enjoyed a good practical joke, a few competitive card games and a couple of cold beers during the week, but they lived for Sundays, when they were actually paid to play a game they truly loved. On game day, these players, including the team’s All Pro quarterback, were all business.With accuracy equaled by only a couple of quarterbacks in the history of the NFL, Stabler picked apart a defense with perfectly timed passes to his favorite receiver, Fred Biletnikoff, before tearing out a defense’s heart and soul with a long bomb to speedy wide receiver Cliff Branch. Every Sunday, the former University of Alabama quarterback used the weapons at his disposal — Biletnikoff, Branch, Casper, et. al — to create offensive masterpieces, much like Picasso used different paints to create a classic. Stabler’s canvas on Sundays was the football field, where he led pro football’s most-feared offensive attack.The fact that Stabler threw for more yards, completed more passes and had the highest completion percentage of any quarterback in the history of the Raiders should have guaranteed him a spot in the Hall of Fame. But it didn’t.
After throwing for 19,078 yards and 150 touchdowns and compiling a winning percentage with the Raiders that was among the best in the history of the NFL, Stabler should be in the Hall of Fame. But he isn’t.
His flawless performance in Super Bowl XI against the Vikings in a dominating win should have elevated him to Hall of Fame status. But it didn’t.
Have the same anti-Raider biases that encouraged officials to overlook opposition fumbles and penalties for decades permeated into Hall of Fame voting? How else can one explain that the field general for one of the NFL’s greatest teams, the 1976 Raiders, isn’t enshrined in Canton?
Raider Nation Journal‘s Randy Shillingburg recently talked with Stabler about his omission from the Hall of Fame, and the Immaculate Reception, Sea of Hands and Holy Roller games.
Raider fans, enjoy this conversation with one of the team’s all-time greats:
* * * * * * *
RS: What are you doing now? I read that you’re going to be doing some work with the University of Alabama as a radio announcer. What else are you doing?
KS: Of course, the radio work we’re going to be doing with Alabama. I did television for a while, and got out of that by choice. I didn’t have the real passion for it. Because it’s the University of Alabama, I want to get back closer to that program. And like I said earlier, expose my children to it so that they can see where Dad played college football. As I said, I’ve got an old Victorian house that was built at the turn of the century, and we’re in the process of putting together a package to develop a piano bar concept — a coffee house type concept — here in Mobile. It will serve as the base for me and what I do. I’ve been real, real busy, doing a lot of traveling, and doing a lot of sports marketing events. I do a lot of corporate work. I’ve been real busy, the schedule has been busy. Things are going well.
RS: Are you having fun?
KS: Having a blast. I always have, and it’s just getting better and better. I think the reason for that is my children. I think the best thing that’s happened to me in an awfully long time is my kids, being with them, getting involved with them and watching them grow, and communicating with them. It’s been just absolutely wonderful.
RS: Was the ’76 team the best Raiders team you were on?
KS: I suppose it has to be because of the result. I mean, the result was the Super Bowl. That’s the reason you go in there. That’s the reason you play is to get to that game and to win that game. We went 13-1, and we beat New England in the first round of the playoffs and we beat Pittsburgh in the AFC Championship Game, and then we beat Minnesota in Super Bowl XI in the Rose Bowl in Pasadena. I had good personal numbers, and a lot of guys had great numbers. That’s the only way you can get there is for everyone to have good years, to play well and to stay healthy. To answer your question: Without a doubt, ’76 was a really good football team. But it was the same guys who were on the ’74, ’75 and ’77 teams also. We were a really good football team who just happened to put it all together, and got the right breaks and stayed healthy, and we got good years out of our people that particular year.
RS: In my column last week, I mentioned something about “You know you’re a true Raiders fan if someone mentions the words, ‘Rob Lytle,’ and you cringe” a little because of the fumble in the ’77 playoff game that wasn’t called.
KS: Well, we had an opportunity to go, you know, to repeat. Not too many football teams have been able to repeat the Super Bowl. It’s awfully hard to get there once. To repeat is even tougher. We had that opportunity and we went right back to the AFC Championship Game in Denver and Rob Lytle — I guess they said he fumbled and it wasn’t called. It was one of those things. You get some of those breaks and sometimes they go against you. You have to play through that, you have to win regardless of the officiating. You have to win regardless of the injuries and you have to win regardless of the turnovers. You just have to find a way. That particular day we weren’t able to find a way to get it done and as a result, we didn’t get to repeat, but we came awfully close.
RS: At what point in the Super Bowl against Minnesota did you know that you had that game won? How early in that game did you know?
KS: Well, I think we were really confident going into that ball game because of our team and you look at the matchups with that team. We understood that we were a much bigger and stronger team and probably we had a little bit more speed than they did. When you went through the AFC West at that point in time, when you played Denver and Kansas City and those teams that were very, very good, and then you had to go play Pittsburgh in the championship game. When you did that, you were pretty much battle-tested for anybody you wanted to play. We felt really good playing Minnesota, going into that game because of our size. Our offensive line matched up really well against their defensive (line). They were really an undersized defensive line with Carl Eller, Jim Marshall, Alan Page and those people, so we felt good. But to answer your question, I think probably — you know the football bounces funny and anything can happen. When you have Chuck Foreman and Ahmad Rashad and Sammy White and Tarkenton and those people, that’s a dangerous team. But to answer your question: probably, uh, late third quarter, early fourth quarter, you feel pretty good and you’re up. Freddie Biletnikoff caught a real deep down and in type pass. The safety missed an assignment or something, and he (Biletnikoff) breaks it down inside the five.
RS: I remember that.
KS: I can remember saying to myself as I watched (Biletnikoff) run, and they tackled him inside the five — I remember saying to myself, “That’s it. It’s basically over.” I don’t know when that happened. I think that might have been late third or early fourth quarter.
RS: How good was Biletnikoff, first of all, and, secondly, what was that pattern that you two worked to perfection? It was perfect timing. He ran downfield, faked to the inside, drove off the defender, broke to the sideline and the ball was right there.
KS: Well, Freddie was a great, great player. I mean, his numbers speak for themselves. He’s a Hall of Fame player. If you get into that situation, that institution, you’re ranked among the greats of all time. I think he is that, and I think that he did it with a little less ability than most. I don’t think he was as fast as most. He wasn’t as big as most, and he wasn’t as strong as most. But he had a tremendous heart, and was a really smart player who understood what people were trying to do to him. He had a great, great set of hands, and he knew what people were trying to do to him. He was a smart player and he was just a great, great “money” player. When you look back, and you look at the games he played, he always stepped up when there was a lot of money on the table, when it was a big game, and it was a big match up against Denver or Kansas City in the division. You look at the AFC Championship games, and he was the MVP in the Super Bowl that we played in. Anytime that you had to win, anytime that you needed big plays, and there was a lot of money on the table, riding on the game, then Freddie always played well. He was a great, great player.
It was a real privilege to have a combination of receivers – a tremendous possession guy like Freddie to make big plays on third downs, a tremendous tight end in Dave Casper, who worked the middle of the field against linebacker and safeties and that sort of thing, and then a little guy with tremendous speed on the outside in Cliff Branch. (He was a) 4.2 type of guy, a 4.2 (seconds) 40 (yards), a guy who could fly. So, you had all of the tools. The play that you talk about, the pattern that you talk about, that Freddie ran so well: We had a couple of them when the ball was thrown on the outside. We had a real deep comeback route where he would run, push the guy off 19, 20 yards, and come back and catch the ball at 15, 17 yards. And then we had one where he would break to the inside and get the guy turned to the inside and break and go back to a corner. This was called the “short corner.” And he ran both of those things to perfection because he had tremendous ability to cut and stop on a dime. He could cut sharp patterns and that sort of thing. He was fun to play with.
RS: (Laughing) You know, I actually remember him dropping ONE ball.
KS: (Laughing) Well, you know, we’re all gonna drop one, we’re all gonna throw an interception, we’re all gonna do that sort of thing. That’s something that he certainly didn’t want to do. You’d never say anything to a guy who drops one. He wants to catch it as bad as you want him to. I always remember him as being a great, great clutch player.
RS: He certainly didn’t drop many, did he?
KS: No he didn’t.
RS: Anytime the ball was near him, he just snagged it right in. If you were faced with a third and one in a Super Bowl, the last minute of the game, and you had to hand the ball off to somebody to pick up that touchdown running the ball, who would you prefer to hand that ball off to?
KS: We had guys that specialized almost in that sort of thing. They were very, very good. First of all, we were a good short yardage team because of a tremendous offensive line. You know, when you run the ball behind Hall of Fame players like Art Shell and Gene Upshaw on the left side, and a 10-year center in Dave Dalby, and George Buehler was just a real horse, and John Vella was just as tough as a nail, and a really good pass blocker and run blocker. We had good people to run behind. And when you run the ball with guys like — Pete Banazak was the smallest of the bunch, from a fullback standpoint, at only about 220, 218, but really quick off the ball (and) smart. (He) understood blocking combinations and that sort of thing, and knew when to cut back and when to make his move. He was a smart runner. And Mark van Eeghen was, you know, a little bit bigger at 225 pounds, 226, 228, somewhere in there, but really quick off the ball, and really hit the line awfully fast, and was really good at that sort of thing. Mark Hubbard, 6-2, 240 — much bigger than the rest of them — tough, big legs, and big determination, a lot of heart. We had guys – any one of those three on third and one — you felt really comfortable in handing them the ball.
RS: I loved to watch Banazak play.
KS: Well, he was a smart player. He was an undersized fullback. Like I said, he was only 215, 218, something like that. (He was a) good cutback runner, good, smart runner who understood the blocking combinations on the play that was called and knew what to look for, and he was kind of our short yardage guy, our third and one, third and two guy, or inside the five-yard line, third and goal, second and goal — that sort of guy. He was very good at that because of his knowledge of the game and because he was really quick off the ball. He had a great start.
RS: Let say you had the same type of this situation, say from seven or eight yards out. Who would you want to pass the ball to, Biletnikoff or Casper? Which receiver would be your preference in that situation when you had to get that pass caught?
KS: You know, I was fortunate to have a group of guys. You don’t go into the game saying, “I’m going to throw the ball to this guy; I’m going to throw the ball to that guy.” You go into the game saying, “I’m gonna let the defense dictate where I throw the ball.” And you have to have the whole set of receivers, and we did. Like I said earlier, we had a possession guy, a big tight end for the middle of the field, and great speed on the outside. (As a clutch third-down receiver, there was) nobody better than Freddie Biletnikoff. There were very few tight ends any better than Casper. And Cliff had so much speed that they played so far off of him that you worked things in front of people with him. We threw the ball to all of those guys in all the situations. We were really fortunate to have a great offensive line that gave you the opportunity and the time to do that sort of thing. To be able to throw the ball to great, great receivers, you can do some damage.
RS: Most people don’t remember this about your career, but you were the quarterback at the end of the game in 1972 in the Immaculate Reception game. You actually ran it in. What was it, 30 yards out? You scrambled and ran it in to put the Raiders ahead 7-6. Is that correct?
KS: Yes, that’s correct. I came in (during) the second half. Daryle Lamonica started the game, and I played the second half, and Casper came in and played. It was really his debut when he got to play and catch some balls. He and I hooked up. It was really the start of our relationship as quarterback-receiver. Yeah, they came on an all-out type of blitz, where they bring all the linebackers, and they bring a safety, and somehow you get outside of that, you scramble outside of that, and there’s no one out there because all of the cornerbacks and the safeties have all run off covering receivers. There’s nobody there. And so I ran the ball in and we scored, and we went up 7-6. And then Pittsburgh got the ball back with a minute and four left. And then Bradshaw goes incomplete on first down, second down, third down. Fourth and 10, and he throws the ball over the middle and Frenchy Fuqua and Jack Tatum get there simultaneously and the ball ricochets off one of them and Franco catches it jogging along, and it’s a weird, strange set of circumstances. It’s one of those plays that will live on forever. It’s one of those plays that every playoff time and during the year, you’ll see it replayed over and over on TV. It’s just a wonderful play to be remembered as a really unique set of circumstances in that game. You know, it was not good for us because we lost and they basically picked our pocket. But for a game to be remembered off of one play, I don’t know if there’s any better than that one.
RS: One of my favorite players on the team, defensive end Tony Cline, missed Bradshaw by inches on the pass rush. I was growing up in northern West Virginia and I listened to the game on KDKA radio out of Pittsburgh. The game wasn’t even televised in the area. It was just devastating. I couldn’t even watch it. I had to listen to it on radio! It was certainly a memorable game. Later on, it seemed as if you were in some memorable games that turned the other way: The Holy Roller game, the Sea of Hands game. What was your thinking during those great plays?
KS: The play in San Diego when I threw the ball out there on the ground — it was just a common sense type play, that I think most quarterbacks would probably have made. I think it was third down. I think there were 10 seconds or eight seconds left, you know, probably not enough time to get off another play. The common sense school of thought is, “Don’t get trapped with the ball. Don’t get sacked.” I mean, if you get sacked, you lose. Interception, you lose. Incomplete pass, you’re probably going to lose. So, you can’t let those things happen. So, coming out of the huddle, you say to yourself that very thing: “Don’t get trapped with the ball. Don’t take a sack. Sack, you lose.” So when the guy got to me — he was a former Alabama linebacker named Woodrow Lowe — and Woody Lowe got to me. In the course of the sack, (I think to myself) “You can’t get sacked with it. Roll it out there. Roll the damn thing out there and shake the dice, and hope that something good happens,” and it did. Pete Banazak dove at it and knocked it down inside the five, and Casper kicked it into the end zone, and fell on it. You know, it was just another one of those plays that will always be relived forever when you’re talking about wild plays, crazy plays, crazy finishes. That one just happened to bounce our way.
RS: (Laughing) You guys caused more rules changes. The “not being able to fumble the ball forward,” the “use of stickem” rules. You kind of stretched the rules a little bit, and then they changed them on you.
KS: Well, that’s probably a good rule. It was a good reason to change the rule. It keeps people from doing that very thing. The last play of the game, if you don’t think you have an opportunity to get another play off, you just throw the damn thing up in the air or roll it out and hope something happens. You know, it’s probably not the way the game should be done, so they make that rule change. It’s a common sense play that I think most quarterbacks would have made in that situation. Just throw the damn thing out and the football bounces funny and maybe it will bounce your way. And it happened to do that.
RS: The Sea of Hands was the “John Vella play,” isn’t that right?
KS: Well, John Vella’s guy, basically John’s man forced me to do what I did. Vern Den Herder was the defensive end for the Dolphins. I think he beat John on a pass play, and he beat him to the outside or the inside, I’m not sure. He forced me out of the pocket and I started to run, and he dived at my legs and tripped me up. In the course of falling down I threw this end-over-end dying duck back into the corner of the end zone. Basically I saw a black jersey there somewhere. I didn’t even know it was Clarence Davis. I just knew that there was a Raider receiver in that area. The ball probably should have been intercepted, but Clarence wanted it worse than they did, and he took it away from two or three people, and Clarence just made a wonderful play out of the whole thing.
RS: It was a wonderful play. Ken, do you consider yourself a Raider, a Saint or an Oiler?
KS: Well, that’s kind of a no brainer. For whatever name I made as an athlete, as a football player, as a quarterback, it has to be as a Raider. I mean, if you look at playing 10 years in one spot compared to two years in Houston and playing three years in New Orleans. For whatever quarterback I am, it has to be that 10 years that I spent in Oakland.
RS: Well, I pretty much figured that, but for the sake of Raider fans around the world, I just wanted to hear you say it. The last question, Ken: Why do you think you’re not in the Hall of Fame? Your numbers, your completion percentage, your ability to win the big game, your ability to drive a team in the last minute — probably no other quarterback in the history of the league was your equal. You’re one of the best quarterbacks ever. Why aren’t you in the Hall of Fame?
KS: Well, I don’t know. I’m not the person to ask that, you know. I don’t know what the criteria is. I don’t really know how it’s done or who votes on that sort of thing. I don’t have any idea. All you can do is go out there and play, and play as hard as you can, and let the cards fall where they may. I don’t have any idea why those things happen, or why you’re not in there. It’s not something that I think about an awful lot unless somebody brings it up. I mean, if you should be there, then eventually maybe you will be. It would be a great honor, but like I said, it’s not something I think about an awful lot.
RS: Well, I tell you what. If you find an e-mail address or phone number of anybody who’s voting on the Hall of Fame, we’ll get some Raider fans around the world — maybe a couple of hundred thousand fans — to send them some e-mail and call them because you certainly deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. If there is anybody out there who isn’t in the Hall of Fame and deserves it more, I don’t know who that would be.
KS: Well, that’s nice of you to say that. I don’t have any problem with it. I mean, I had a wonderful career. I think that anytime you’re blessed to play with the guys we’ve been talking about, and playing for John Madden and Bum Phillips and guys like that. It was an awful lot of fun. They let you be the kind of player you want to be on the field, and the kind of guy you want to be off the field. I don’t have any problem with my standing in the football community. I had a great career and we won — we won a world championship. I was paid the way most quarterbacks were paid. I don’t have any problem with it. If it happens, it happens. If it doesn’t, then I’m content with where I’ve been and how I got there.
RS: Well, you were certainly one of my favorite players, and I know you’re the favorite player for a lot of the people who will be reading this interview in the Raider Nation Journal. It’s been an honor, Ken. Raider Nation Journal is written by Raider fans for Raider fans around the world. We’re very proud to have interviewed you today. Thanks, Kenny.
KS: Thank you, Randy.
|You are prohibited from republication, retransmission, reproduction, or other use of any text, graphics, or photos on any page on this site. Raider Nation and Raider Nation Journal are trademarks of Raider Nation, Inc. All other images and trademarks are properties of their respective owners. Copyright (c) 1998 Raider Nation. All rights reserved.|
Too many hours of my life have been wasted in meetings with senior level management who were clueless about the nature of WIP. One such manager truly believed that managing WIP would insure that the project was managed profitability. They would grill the project manager for explanations on why the WIP on a project, and their office, was being managed so poorly, from a previous post – dumbass. Everyone understood the futility of the exercise except for this completely clueless senior manager. Of course no one wanted to tell this senior manager the futility of the exercise since they would then be subjected to a string of personal invectives intended to stifle questioning.
When this manager was asked about the concept and mechanism of how WIP worked in various circumstances they could not answer. Yet they were comfortable in speaking authoritatively on what WIP should be and how to insure that it was accurately calculated. Call them clueless……
Really, you mean to tell me that reversing the prior month WIP and then entering the current month WIP is the way you record the effect of WIP in the current month?? WOW, I did not know that. Really? You are expounding on the importance of WIP and how you need to manage it which is, first, incorrect as you should “manage projects, not WIP” and you don’t even know how it is calculated. You don’t even understand that it is the incremental difference month over month which affects the income statement!!!! Puhleez, why are you wasting everyone’s time?? I can imagine this same exercise in futility continues to this day with this senior manager, clueless.
Combine this with the other senior managers who were incapable of independent thought and you have the making of an epic comedy. Moe falls all over himself trying to walk and chew gum at the same time. Duh, whatever they said I agree with, please don’t yell at me. Someone get this guy a new hairdo, LOL. Curly, scratches his balls and continues to stare down at the table so he doesn’t have to contribute anything intelligent to the analysis, which he is incabable of doing. Larry makes some cute remark which is how he starts every conversation to ingratiate himself with the senior manager. Something witty and ass kissing that keeps his nose firmly planted up the senior managers ass, LOL. No need to change this process, just humor the senior manager and let them think something is being accomplished, LOL. Another two hours of my life that I will never get back……….
Here is what a typical Q&A session might be like with the likes of Moe, Larry, Curly and Jane…
– OK guys how many of you know the difference between positive and negative WIP?
Jane: Oh, Oh, me, me, me Jane stammers expressively jumping up and down with arms flailing in the air.
– Yes Jane, you go ahead and tell us the difference.
Jane: Easy peezy, positive WIP is when the positive ions outnumber the negative ions and negative WIP is when negative ions outnumber the positive ions!! She does the superstar cheerleader stance with smug satisfaction.
– Are you shitting me, this is your answer after I have explained it a million times before. You are truly clueless. Moe, what is the correct answer?
Moe: I agree with Jane on the positive negative thing. Is that OK?
– Again, are you shitting me, are you totally spineless? Wait, I already know the answer to that, LOL. Curly, what is the correct answer?
Curly: Mumbling, grumbling, and gurgling sound…. Uh, scratching his balls and rearranging things in the nether region and then he states, “I am opposed”.
– WTF, what the hell are you opposed to? That was not the question.
Curly: I don’t care, I am opposed.
– Jesus, this is great. Larry, what is the correct answer?
Larry: Well Jane you are looking very chipper for so early in the morning, did you smoke some meth before you came in this morning? Yuk, Yuk, Yuk….. Maybe the coffee has some extra caffeine in it, Yuk, Yuk, Yuk. Anyway the answer is whatever Jane says it is!
– Great, all of you are totally worthless.
This is a journey to the dark side of the moon where there exists a vacuum between the ears. A black hole from which no intelligent thought escapes. A time warp in which meetings repeat themselves month after month, week after week and the same non-results are celebrated as progress!!! Yet, the profit fade and poor project management never change. There is consistency in the fact that nothing changes – poor estimating and project management are the rule, not the exception.
Managing your project effectively means monitoring and changing the following as things change over the life of the project: Contract value, Change Orders, Original estimate, and Estimate to complete. If you maintain realism of these items the beneficiary is the WIP. The WIP does not drive project profitability, your actions on the project do. Those who say they don’t know how their project is doing because the WIP is incorrect are simply wrong. They don’t know where their project is because they have not managed their project. The following statement will never ring true, “if it wasn’t for my WIP I would have made my margins on this project.”. WIP does not drive project profitability, it is a byproduct of good project management. MANAGE PROJECTS, DO NOT MANAGE WIP.
Lesson learned: Oh clueless ones, Better to Remain Silent and Be Thought a Fool than to Speak and Remove All Doubt
Jim, it is not your message we don’t like but it is in the delivery. Usually this is said after the umpteenth time I have tried to deliver the message in the most politically correct way possible. This usually is followed by, “You just don’t understand the circumstances”. As if I had not delivered the same message, about the same situation, a million times before. No, maybe it is not me, but you, that needs to wake up and smell the roses, or usually manure by the time we get to this point.
Here is how it typically goes:
First time: Hey everybody, we better watch out for the cliff coming up – don’t you think? No one listens, over the cliff we go.
Second time: Hey everybody, remember last time we went over the cliff, wasn’t much fun was it? Let’s watch out for that cliff, OK? No one listens, over the cliff we go.
Third time: Hey everybody, I am really tired of warning about the cliff, think we can listen up this time and avoid going over? No one listens, over the cliff we go.
Fourth time: OK, YOU FUCKING MORONS I HAVE WARNED YOU ABOUT THE FUCKING CLIFF SEVERAL TIMES, NOW STOP FUCKING AROUND AND STOP!! Response: Geez Jim, no need to get upset about this and we really don’t appreciate how you delivered the message. Plus, you don’t seem to understand the circumstances that precipitated us going over the cliff previously. We would appreciate it if you would not speak to us that way.
No, I think I understand what the circumstances are – a complete lackadaisical attitude of management to address known problems in a proactive and assertive way. Therefore, the problem continues to cause havoc amongst the staff until someone has the wherewithal to question why we don’t change things. Of course, then you get the “you just don’t understand and we don’t like your delivery” speech. It is always flipped over on to the person raising the obvious as if they should just shut up and go along for the ride over the cliff – over and over and over.
I was asked once by a senior manager why I had to address a situation in such harsh terms. My response, because when I have raised the issue in subtle, but less direct, terms you don’t get it. These are the same people, however, who have adopted the attitude that the person raising the obvious is the problem versus the fact that nothing is done to address the real problem.
A classic moment was at the architecture firm that was trying to implement the new ERP system but did not have a clue they were headed towards the cliff. After several months trying to get upper management to see the impending cliff they hired a new IT manager who was charged with getting the mess organized. He delivered the “your delivery is a problem” speech which set me off on my usual response. It did not matter how the message was delivered – nice, slow, articulate, spelled out, in English, in French, with sugar on top, or laced with invective. Of course, the new guy coming in sees the delivery as the problem when the real problem was the inability of management to listen to the input they were receiving in an intelligent manner. Plus, they had succumbed to groupthink which immediately belittled opposing viewpoints.
Isn’t it funny that the delivery of the message is a sufficient enough excuse for people to ignore the obvious problem multiple times? It becomes the standard excuse for why managers continue to make bad decisions. Well, had he delivered the message to me better I would not have made the same mistakes over and over again – does that really make sense to anyone? Mediocre management relies upon this excuse as a crutch to justify their poor practices.
Lesson Learned: question management that uses delivery of the message as a sufficient excuse for bad practice, it never is. It is the ultimate straw man argument.